Bug#302035: cm-super for Debian, problems with tetex
(Although not strictly about psnfss, this bug is probably the best place
for archiving).
Ralf Stubner <Ralf.Stubner@physik.uni-erlangen.de> wrote:
>> Ralf, do you
>> know which other sources should be moved along with it? Everyting in
>> jnkappen/ec?
>
> I would say everything from CTAN:fonts/jnkappen/ec. I think this can be
> found in jnkappen/ec and jnkappen/tc (textcompanion fonts, ie, TS1
> encoding).
That shouldn't be hard to implement. Or rather to keep in mind when
rewriting the splitting scheme; at least the -doc part can be much
simplified.
>> Is there someting like a "required" list for fonts?
>
> Good question. One definitely needs CM (with additions from AMS, maybe
> Euler, too), preferably also in Type1 format (bluesky + tt2001).
What is tt2001?
> EC and TC fonts (CM in T1 and TS1 encoding) are also essential
> IMO. Since the cyrillic bundle is also a required part of LaTeX, in
> principle CM in T2[ABC] and OT2 encoding is also needed (eg, LH
> fonts), but I don't no much about cyrillic fonts.
We could ask Walter Schmidt about this.
> PSNFSS calls in the
> URW fonts plus charter, mathpazo and FPL. On the other hand, pxfonts,
> txfonts, and antt, which are all in tetex-base, are not 'required'
> IMHO.
And antp - strangely the fd files are in tetex-extra, but the afm, tfm
and pfb files are in -base. I hope we don't have more of similar
inconsistencies.
> One other font related thing: I promised some time ago to check whether
> tetex-extra still needs to depend on gsfonts. I am meanwhile sure that
> this is no longer necessary, since tetex-extra provides its own set of
> these fonts.
I've changed that in my working copy.
> On the contrary, it would be interesting to configure gs
> such that it use the fonts provided by teTeX. They might be an older
> version, but are simply less troublesome, at least for the time being.
> However, at the moment I don't understand how gs finds its fonts on
> Debian in the first place. Things like the basicly empty 'Fontmap' being
> a configuration files while the real 'Fontmap.GS' is not ...
Will you follow up on that, or should we just file a bug on gsfonts and
wait whether anything happens?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Reply to: